Editorial Policy

Last updated: August 1, 2026

This site analyses public companies in industries I work in professionally. That creates obligations most blogs don't have. This page sets out the rules I hold myself to, so you can judge the work by a standard I've published in advance rather than one I invent afterwards.

Sourcing

Everything factual on this site traces back to material anyone can access. In practice:

• Company filings, earnings calls, investor day presentations, and press releases
• Granted patents and published patent applications
• Peer-reviewed research and conference proceedings
• Manufacturer datasheets and published specifications
• Reporting by established trade and financial press, cited and linked

If I can't point to a public source for a factual claim, I don't publish the claim. Where a number is derived rather than reported — a calculation, an estimate, a range — I show the inputs and the arithmetic so you can disagree with it.

What I don't write about

I work as a robotics software engineer in semiconductor manufacturing. To keep that from contaminating the analysis, I exclude the following, permanently and without exception:

• My employer. Not by name, not by implication, not as an unnamed example.
• Companies my employer deals with directly, as customer or supplier, where my role could give me visibility others don't have.
• Anything non-public I've learned at work — not as a source, not as background, not as intuition I quietly act on.

Sometimes this means skipping a topic I could cover well. I'd rather have a smaller subject range that's clearly clean than a wider one that requires you to trust my restraint.

How deep I go on process technology

This site stops at the question of why something is hard and what that costs. It does not walk through how to do it. You won't find process recipes, tool parameters, integration schemes, or anything that reads as an implementation guide, even where such material has been published somewhere.

That's partly a legal boundary and partly an editorial one. The readers here are investors, not process engineers. What matters to them is why only a few companies can do a thing, how durable that advantage is, and what it does to margins — not the recipe.

Fact, estimate, and opinion

These are different things and I mark them differently. A sourced fact carries a citation. An estimate says it is one and shows its working. An opinion is written in the first person and flagged as judgment — usually with language like "I think" or "my read is". Where my professional experience informs a judgment but can't be cited, I say that explicitly rather than dressing it up as established fact.

What this site is not

It is not investment advice, and it is not a stock-picking service. I don't publish price targets, ratings, or buy and sell recommendations, and nothing here is tailored to your situation. See the full disclaimer for the complete statement.

Conflicts of interest

Where I hold a position in a company I write about, I disclose it in the article itself. I don't write about a company for the purpose of moving its price, and I don't trade around my own publication schedule.

This site carries advertising. Advertisers have no input into what I cover or what I conclude, no advance access to articles, and no ability to have anything removed. I don't accept sponsored posts, paid placements, or payment for coverage. If that ever changes, this page changes first and the disclosure appears on the article.

Corrections

I will get things wrong. When I do, I fix it in the open rather than quietly editing the page.

• Factual errors are corrected in place, with a dated correction note at the foot of the article describing what was wrong.
• Substantive changes to an argument are marked as updates, with the original reasoning left visible.
• Typos and formatting are fixed silently — no note.

I don't delete published articles to hide a bad call. If an argument doesn't survive contact with reality, the more useful thing is to leave it up and write about why it failed.

Use of AI

I write the analysis and the prose myself. I use AI tools for the same things I'd use a spell-checker or a search engine for — copy-editing, locating source documents, checking arithmetic. No article here is AI-generated, and AI output is never a source. Every factual claim is verified against the primary document, not against a model's summary of it.

Independence

Views expressed here are mine alone. They do not represent my employer or any organisation I'm affiliated with, and nothing on this site is published on anyone's behalf.

Questions and challenges

If you think something here is wrong, tell me — corrections from readers who know a subsystem better than I do are the most valuable feedback this site gets. See the contact page.

— Tony